Even before the Wing of Zion plane landed in the United States, Israel’s media followed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s diplomatic visit with a wave of skepticism.
Commentators and analysts questioned Netanyahu’s ability to achieve real results, especially in light of early reports of alleged tension with the American administration. Some expected drama, others searched for cracks, and some hoped to see US restraint or a change in policy. In reality, events unfolded quite differently.
One commentator claimed: “Netanyahu flew to Florida to buy time and political backing… the visit will run on a perforated schedule… and between extended meetings and long interviews, Netanyahu is mainly buying time – both politically and legally.”
Another analysis concluded that “The show at Mar-a-Lago supplied Netanyahu with perfect campaign material: personal glorification and hints about Gaza, Iran, and clemency – while in practice, there is no real progress on Gaza. A lot of images, little on-the-ground results.” Really?
Clear lines drawn, no more ambiguity
The issues on the agenda were clear: the growing Iranian threat, Tehran’s attempts to renew its nuclear program and rebuild its missile array, the future of the fighting in Gaza, and the day after Hamas. Even before Netanyahu arrived in Miami, doubts were raised about the extent of American commitment. But the meetings with President Donald Trump changed the picture entirely.
Trump reshuffled the deck. The central message that emerged from the talks was sharp and unmistakable: Israel will not allow Iran to rearm, and any such attempt will be met with military force – with full American backing. No hints, no softened language, no diplomatic ambiguity. A red line was drawn in terms that left no room for doubt.
To understand the depth of this signal, one must understand Trump’s worldview. For him, foreign policy is not an ideological arena but a cold business domain. Countries, regimes, and organizations are judged by one question: Do they serve American interests, or do they harm them?
That is how one should read the operation in Venezuela and Trump’s approach toward its de facto leader, Nicolás Maduro – opposition to a dictatorial regime, a fight against the drug cartels, and a message to the world. Those willing to make a clear deal under American rules gain legitimacy; those who refuse pay an economic, diplomatic, and sometimes military price.
This is a direct signal to Iran, Russia, and China. Not a moral speech, not a utopian vision – but business. Iran must choose between dismantling its threat mechanisms or facing isolation. Russia now understands that the gray zone of ambiguity is over. China realizes the economic game is no longer one-sided.
ALL RECEIVE the same message: the door is open to a deal, but anyone who challenges the American order will be met with force.
The direction in Gaza was also clarified. Trump stated that progress to the second phase of the American outline would only be possible after Hamas is disarmed. No gradual process, no security compromises, no shortcuts. Hamas, it was made clear, cannot continue to exist as a military force.
If the organization does not disarm, Israel will continue fighting – this time with full American backing and without reservations. The message to Gaza is the same as the message to Tehran: disarm, or pay a heavy price.
At the same time, Trump signaled his next strategic objective: transitioning from combat to reconstruction in Gaza. However, he chose to politely sidestep a highly sensitive issue – the release of hostage Ran Gvili. There was neither denial nor commitment, only a hesitant promise, suggesting an American preference to advance long-term strategic goals even at the cost of delaying painful questions.
For Israel, the visit produced significant gains. The American commitment to disarm Hamas is not merely a political declaration but tangible backing for the position Israel has held since October 7: there will be no rebuilding without demilitarization, and there is no future for Gaza while Hamas rules it armed.
The Turkish issue also surfaced, albeit incidentally. When asked about F-35 aircraft, Trump responded with a short but loaded sentence: they will not be used against Israel. Not a speech, not a public warning – but a very clear statement.
Six meetings were held between Netanyahu and Trump, an extraordinary number by any diplomatic standard. The final meeting was the warmest and most complimentary. Trump did not hide his appreciation for the prime minister and even showered praise that went far beyond customary diplomatic politeness.
Here the Israeli political arena comes into play. Without saying it explicitly, Trump effectively opened Israel’s next election campaign. The message was clear: this is the leader with whom he knows how to “do business.”
Ultimately, Netanyahu’s visit to the United States was not merely a diplomatic event – it was a global strategic signal. Those who looked for ambiguity were disappointed. Those seeking a clear line received one.
In a Middle East saturated with threats, clarity itself can sometimes be power.
It appears the conduct of the president of the United States is not a passing episode but a clear declaration marking America’s return to the language of deterrence. Trump is signaling that the era of ambiguity is over: those who threaten will pay a price; those willing to dismantle threats and respect rules will receive an opportunity.
The message is directed at America’s enemies – but also at its allies. Trump does not intend to manage endless conflicts; he intends to impose order. For Israel, the meaning is clear: confirmation of the president’s commitment that Gaza will be demilitarized – whether through agreement or by force.
The writer is CEO of Radius 100FM, honorary consul and deputy dean of the Consular Diplomatic Corps, president of the Israeli Radio Communications Association, and formerly an Army Radio monitor and NBC television correspondent.